- #1
OOO
- 304
- 0
Since irony is not so well suited to further compassion and understanding I question in this thread that by categorizing some ideas as a thought experiment there's justification of treating these ideas as well-posed in the scientific sense. I have got three examples:
1) "Doesn't one, by comitting suicide, not actually die but take ultimate control over reality ?"
2) "What happens if we travel at the speed of light ?"
3) "And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God ?"
Since the third thought experiment could be misunderstood either as bigotry or as another violent act of sarcasm I shall explain to you that I am serious about this and it is only meant as a question about which questions make sense and which don't.
More clearly, what constitutes a valid thought experiment ? Do we have to care about validity at all ?
1) "Doesn't one, by comitting suicide, not actually die but take ultimate control over reality ?"
2) "What happens if we travel at the speed of light ?"
3) "And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God ?"
Since the third thought experiment could be misunderstood either as bigotry or as another violent act of sarcasm I shall explain to you that I am serious about this and it is only meant as a question about which questions make sense and which don't.
More clearly, what constitutes a valid thought experiment ? Do we have to care about validity at all ?